SCIO Confirmation of EM Group?

[TPharao]

Hi Sol & Leigh,

It is almost two month now since you did a powerful Elucidation session for me. I had forgotten my ElectroMagnetic Schematic I belong to and therefore used the tech discribed in your book to find it out. I figured out that I belong to  Schematic "3".

 

Yesterday, I had a  regular session with my homeopath using the SCIO software as a diagnostic tool. She found out most of those symptoms mentioned under Chacra "5" which I am at the moment.  I was stunned and saw it as great confirmation.

 

Today, by chance I found the support material for the Potentiation session you had send me almost a year ago. In that I belong to Schematic "1".  Now I am puzzled. I still feel that I belong to "3".

 

Do you have any ideas/comments? Was I just fooling myself?

 

Thanks,

 

Tony

 

[Leigh]

Hi Frank,

SCIO and biofeedback therapies are Era 2, mostly just stimulating the nervous system. Any modality using technological devices is going to be Era 2. As for other modalities using sounds waves, it depends. What's generating the sounds waves? If it's a machine, it's probably Era 2. It's possible that the approach you mentioned could effect genetic change if it's incorporating a language that DNA understands. For more information on this concept outside of Regenetics materials, you can check out Peter Gariaev's articles on wave-genetics in our DNA MONTHLY archives: http://www.phoenixregenetics.org/resources/dna-monthly/archives.

Thanks!

Leigh

[Frantisek Nagy]

Hi Sol, Leigh,

regarding the SCIO software biofeedback device I would like to ask, in reference to Era 1, 2, 3 of medicine, where could we categorize biofeedback therapies? Is it still  just the stimulation of the nervous system?  From different angle, I have heard of therapeutic devices, that send just sound waves according to the concrete defect organ (since each organ has its specific unique sound print  being emitted) so that the distortion is harmonized this way. Could such approach hypothetically  result also in genetic change on DNA level?

Thanks

Frank

[Sol]

Right on, Tony. I agree that the Schematic is certainly not the most important aspect of this work, although it can be a helpful resource. :-)

TPharao said:

Thanks Sol for your answer. I will take Schematic "1" now too into account. I feel that it does not really matter.

The only thing that matters is that there are some sort of aggrevation showing up which gives me a  feeling that it works.

 

Thanks,

 

Tony

[TPharao]

Thanks Sol for your answer. I will take Schematic "1" now too into account. I feel that it does not really matter.

The only thing that matters is that there are some sort of aggrevation showing up which gives me a  feeling that it works.

 

Thanks,

 

Tony

[Sol]

Cool. I would trust your gut instinct combined with the third-party confirmation. Leigh and I are historically pretty accurate with our muscle testing, but occasionally we get it wrong. Thankfully, this has no bearing on Potentiation's results, only its interpretation relative to the Schematic. :-) I appreciate your sharing this story!